Excerpts from Sylvain Bauza's message of 2013-12-14 06:23:48 -0800:
> 2013/12/9 Clint Byrum
>
> > Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2013-12-09 09:34:06 -0800:
> > > I'm thinking more generic:
> > >
> > > The cloud provider will provide one or more "suballocating" images. The
> > one Triple
2013/12/9 Clint Byrum
> Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2013-12-09 09:34:06 -0800:
> > I'm thinking more generic:
> >
> > The cloud provider will provide one or more "suballocating" images. The
> one Triple O uses to take a bare metal node and make vm's available would
> be the obvious on
Hi Kevin,
2013/12/2 Fox, Kevin M
> Hi all,
>
> I just want to run a crazy idea up the flag pole. TripleO has the concept
> of an under and over cloud. In starting to experiment with Docker, I see a
> pattern start to emerge.
>
> * As a User, I may want to allocate a BareMetal node so that it i
On 14 December 2013 09:50, Jay Pipes wrote:
>
> Is this set in stone? In other words, is it a given that in order to
> create the seed undercloud, that you need to use DIB to do it? Instead
> of an image that is pre-constructed and virsh'd into, what about
> constructing one or more LXC templates
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 09:40 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 6 December 2013 14:11, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> > I think the security issue can be handled by not actually giving the
> > underlying resource to the user in the first place.
> >
> > So, for example, if I wanted a bare metal node's worth
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 09:40 +1300, Robert Collins wrote:
> On 6 December 2013 14:11, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> > I think the security issue can be handled by not actually giving the
> > underlying resource to the user in the first place.
> >
> > So, for example, if I wanted a bare metal node's worth
On 6 December 2013 14:11, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> I think the security issue can be handled by not actually giving the
> underlying resource to the user in the first place.
>
> So, for example, if I wanted a bare metal node's worth of resource for my own
> containering, I'd ask for a bare metal no
Excerpts from Fox, Kevin M's message of 2013-12-09 09:34:06 -0800:
> I'm thinking more generic:
>
> The cloud provider will provide one or more "suballocating" images. The one
> Triple O uses to take a bare metal node and make vm's available would be the
> obvious one to make available initially
@redhat.com]
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2013 8:50 AM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][TripleO] Nested resources
On Dec 5, 2013, at 8:11 PM, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> I think the security issue can be handled by not actually giving the
mentation bits could be used.
>
> Thanks,
> Kevin
>
> From: Mark McLoughlin [mar...@redhat.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:53 PM
> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Subject: Re: [openstac
M
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][TripleO] Nested resources
Hi Kevin,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 12:39 -0800, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
Hi all,
I just want to run a crazy idea up the flag pole. TripleO has the
concept of an under and ove
tion
bits could be used.
Thanks,
Kevin
From: Mark McLoughlin [mar...@redhat.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 1:53 PM
To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][TripleO] Nested resources
Hi Kevin,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 12:39 -0
Hi Kevin,
On Mon, 2013-12-02 at 12:39 -0800, Fox, Kevin M wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I just want to run a crazy idea up the flag pole. TripleO has the
> concept of an under and over cloud. In starting to experiment with
> Docker, I see a pattern start to emerge.
>
> * As a User, I may want to allocat
13 matches
Mail list logo
